By Richard Johnstone | 16 October 2013
The powers and responsibilities of the London Assembly resemble a ‘dog’s breakfast’ and need to be reformed, MPs said today.
In an examination of the role of the London Assembly, which was created to hold the mayor of London to account, the communities and local government select committee said ‘anomalies’ in the role of members had led to confusion.
It is currently difficult for the public to ‘disentangle’ the powers and responsibilities of the assembly, they observed.
Among the anomalies highlighted was that assembly members could be appointed by the mayor to his cabinet, or to sit on other Greater London Authority bodies such as the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority while retaining their status as assembly members.
This means a member can be tasked with holding the executive to account in one area while working on behalf of the mayor in another, MPs said.
The committee concluded the assembly should be reformed so any members who join the mayor’s cabinet, or sit on GLA boards, are required to give up their seat.
The assembly’s powers should also be reformed so that it can ‘call in’ mayoral decisions for examination, mirroring the relationship local councils have with directly elected mayors.
AMs should be given the ability to amend the mayor’s capital budget, in addition to their current role of approving the revenue budgets. They should also be able to review and, if necessary, reject the mayor's appointment of any deputy mayors.
CLG committee chair Clive Betts said the London Assembly was the right body to hold the London mayor to account, but it needed reform to be effective.
Expansion of the remit of the mayor to include responsibility for policing and crime in London had resulted in ‘a dog’s breakfast of responsibilities, with the assembly lacking a clear role and understandable powers’, Betts said.
Now was time to debate how the governance of London could be made to work better, he said.
‘The current arrangements are neither explicable to the general public nor can the London model be used in the rest of the country.
‘It is time to sort out the anomalies in the assembly’s powers and to forge for it a more identifiable role as the body charged with holding the mayor to account.’
London Assembly chair Darren Johnson welcomed the report. ‘I am grateful to the committee for taking up so many of the assembly’s recommendations for achieving greater consistency and transparency at the GLA,’ he said. ‘In particular, the proposal to give the assembly the power to call in the mayor’s decisions for examination before they are implemented.’
However, local government minister Brandon Lewis said the current system ‘strikes the right balance between ensuring that the mayor has the powers needed to deliver, whilst ensuring that the assembly is able to hold the mayor to account and protect taxpayers’ interests’.
He added: ‘There is broad consensus that the Mayor of London provides clear, accountable leadership and is working for London.
‘If and when Parliamentary time allows, there may be scope for small, sensible improvements to tidy up the complex legislation we have inherited from the last administration, but I doubt many Londoners see this as an urgent priority.’
